• realcaseyrollins@narwhal.cityOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    From what I’m hearing, it’s very likely that SCOTUS will uphold that actions that are part of official duties will have presidential immunity, but other activities will not.

    For example, let’s say that terrorists were in a building in America, and Trump authorized a strike on that building, killing many civilians (just as an example). That would be an official action, qualifying him from immunity. But, if he does something like bash his wife’s head in, even as president, he does not have immunity from that.

    It’s my understanding that this is the traditional view of the laws in question, I am not sure that Trump will be able to get that immunity expanded like he wants.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think this will be a narrow focus on specific events. They don’t want a broad rule that will keep coming up in court.

      I admit this is a tough one, and no matter what happens, people will scream politics while ignoring how difficult this question is to answer.

      People often scream politics when the answer is the correct one. Roe Vs Wade is a good example where it should have been ruled the way it had been ruled. I am pro-choice but the courts overstepped when creating roe.

      Congress has the power to make laws, not the courts.